Text of the provision

Art. 135. Any of the following shall be considered sufficient cause for judicial separation of property:

(1) That the spouse of the petitioner has been sentenced to a penalty which carries with it civil interdiction;

(2) That the spouse of the petitioner has been judicially declared an absentee;

(3) That loss of parental authority of the spouse of petitioner has been decreed by the court;

(4) That the spouse of the petitioner has abandoned the latter or failed to comply with his or her obligations to the family as provided for in Article 101;

(5) That the spouse granted the power of administration in the marriage settlements has abused that power; and

(6) That at the time of the petition, the spouses have been separated in fact for at least one year and reconciliation is highly improbable.

In the cases provided for in Numbers (1), (2) and (3), the presentation of the final judgment against the guilty or absent spouse shall be enough basis for the grant of the decree of judicial separation of property.

(191a)

Family Code of the Philippines, Executive Order No. 209, approved July 6, 1987. The Code took effect on August 3, 1988 (Republic v. Orbecido III, G.R. No. 154380, October 5, 2005). Reproduced in full.

What this article means

When only one spouse wants out of the shared property regime, they must prove one of six sufficient causes:

For the first three — interdiction, absence, loss of parental authority — the final judgment itself is enough to obtain the decree; the petitioner need not prove anything more.

Related provisions

Cases interpreting this article

Note. The text of the provision above is reproduced in full from the official enactment. The annotation, case summaries and commentary around it are the work of Vivas & Nobles Law Office and are general legal information, not legal advice. Whether this provision applies to a particular marriage depends on facts that only a lawyer reviewing your situation can assess.